Born in Rome or Tuscany, Italy; died in Rome, November 10, 461; feast day
formerly April 11.

"In Jesus
humility was taken up into majesty, weakness into strength, mortality into
eternity; and to pay the debt that we humans had incurred, an inviolable nature
was united with a nature capable of suffering. He assumed the form of a servant
without the stain of sin, enhancing what was human, not detracting from what
was divine" --Leo the Great. Born in Tuscany or in Rome of Tuscan parents,
Leo was a man of the noblest character and great ability. He became a deacon
under Saint Celestine I and later under Saint Sixtus III. Saint Cyril wrote
directly to him, and Saint John Cassian dedicated his treatise against
Nestorius to him.

In 440, Leo was
sent to arbitrate a dispute between Aetius and Albinus, the imperial generals
whose quarrels were leaving Gaul open to attacks by the barbarians. While he
was still with the two generals, a deputation came to announce the death of
Pope Sixtus III and his own succession to the papacy.

Leo took the Chair
of Saint Peter on September 29, 440. In this capacity he showed himself a true
shepherd and father of souls during a time of crisis both in the Church and in
the empire. He immediately set about advancing and consolidating the Roman see,
and began his pastoral duties with a series of 96 still extant sermons on faith,
encouraging various acts of Christian social charity, elaborating on Christian
doctrine, strenuously opposing Manichaeanism, Pelagianism, Priscillianism, and
Nestorianism, and defending papal primacy in the jurisdiction of the Church.

Because of his
efforts to preserve the integrity of the faith, to defend the unity of the
Church, and to repel or mitigate the ef- fects of the barbarian invasions, he
well deserves to be called "the Great."

In 448 he received
a letter from an abbot (archimandrite) in Constantinople, Eutyches, complaining
about the revival of the Nestorian heresy. He replied guardedly and promised to
make enquiries. The following year Leo received a protest by Eutyches
(supported by the Emperor Theodosius II) against the fact that Saint Flavian,
patriarch of Constantinople, had excommunicated him. Duplicates of this letter
were sent to the patriarchs of Alexandria and Jerusalem.

Because no official
notice of Eutyches excommunication proceedings had reached Rome, Leo wrote to
Flavian, who sent a report of the synod at which the abbot had been sentenced.
Communication with Saint Flavian revealed that Eutyches denied the two natures
of Christ--making him a heretic.

In 449, a council
was summoned at Ephesus by Emperor Theodosius, with the superficial intention
of investigating the matter. The synod, dubbed "the Robber Synod,"
was packed with Eutyches's friends and acquitted him while condemning Saint
Flavian. Dioscorus, the patriarch of Alexandria, prevented the papal legates
from reading aloud a letter Pope Leo had sent through Flavian. Saint Flavian
was physically assaulted during the synod and died from the violence done to
his person during his deposition.

Following the
council Dioscorus was intruded as patriarch of Constantinople in place of Flavian
by Emperor Theodosius.

In 451, under
Emperor Marcian, 600 bishops and Leo's representatives met during the fourth
general council at Chalcedon to consider the teaching of Eutyches
(Monophysism). Leo's doctrinal letter (The Dogmatic Letter or Tome of Saint
Leo) on the Incarnation was acclaimed as the basis of the council's declaration
of orthodox doctrine on Christ's two natures.

This Tome was the
letter sent to the earlier synodal council through Patriarch Flavian of
Constantinople, suppressed by Dioscorus, which stated that in Jesus Christ
"was born true God in the entire and perfect nature of true man. . . . The
Son of God, came down from heaven without withdrawing from his Father's glory,
and entered this lower world, born after a new order, by a new mode of
birth."

Thus, Saint Flavian
was vindicated in the Council of Chalcedon and Dioscorus was excommunicated and
deposed.

The immediate aim
of Saint Leo was to combat the teaching of the monk Eutyches, who had insisted
that Jesus had only one nature, since (Eutyches maintained) his human nature
was absorbed into his divine nature. But the Tome also greatly enhanced the
papacy for the Council of Chalcedon recognized Leo's teaching as "the
voice of Saint Peter."

The Council of
Chalcedon also issued a canon that Leo refused to recognize: Constantinople was
given a dignity second only to Rome above that of Alexandria and Antioch, which
threatened to disrupt an ancient traditional order.

The following year,
after Attila the Hun had plundered Milan and destroyed Pavia, Leo in person
went to Peschiera to confront the invading Huns at the river Mincio, and
induced Attila--in consideration of an annual tribute from Rome--to withdraw
beyond the Danube. Unfortunately, he could not stop the Vandals. In 455 the
Vandal Genseric attacked and sacked Rome, but Leo persuaded him against killing
the inhabitants and burning the city.

After the Vandals
departed, Leo ministered to the people, replacing the treasures of the
churches, and he sent missionary priests with money to Africa to minister to
the captives, whom the Vandals took with them, and to purchase their freedom.

In his lifetime Leo
gained the respect of people of all ranks, from emperors to barbarians, and his
sagacity and effectiveness were to influence the concept of the papacy for
centuries. Saint Leo continually attempted to meet the demands of his day
firmly and authoritatively. He saw the need to strengthen and extend the
influence of the Roman Church; he exerted his authority as pope in Spain, in Gaul,
in Illyricum, and in North Africa. His actions provided the energetic central
authority needed for stability during this chaotic time.

Leo the Great left
432 (Walsh says 143) surviving letters as well as the 96 sermons noted
previously. His writings are remarkable for their precision and clear
expression, revealing him to be a decisive and firm man, who speaks with the
voice of Peter.

He secured the
support of Emperor Valentinian III, although he did not manage to persuade the
whole eastern church to accept his jurisdiction.

Saint Leo was
typical of the best Roman character: energetic, magnanimous, consistent and
unswerving in duty, his religion firmly anchored in the central Christian
mystery of the Incarnation of the Word. He always trusted in God, was never
discouraged, and maintained an unruffled equanimity even in the most difficult
circumstances. The learned Pope Benedict XIV in 1754 added Saint Leo's name to
those of the doctors of the Church. His relics are preserved in the Vatican
basilica (Attwater, Bentley, Delaney, Jalland, Walsh, White).

Leo is depicted as
a pope with a dragon near him as in the 15th- century Breviary of Martin of
Aragon. Sometimes he is shown (1) with SS Peter and Paul confronting Attila;
(2) Saint Peter giving him the Pallium; (3) angels surrounding him; (4) meeting
Attila the Hun at the gates of Rome; (5) on horseback, with Attila and his
soldiers kneeling before him; or (6) praying at the tomb of Saint Peter
(Roeder, White).

SOURCE : http://www.saintpatrickdc.org/ss/1110.shtml

His relics are
preserved in the Vatican Basilica. He is the patron saint of choristers and
musicians (Roeder).

Le Saint Pape Léon devant Attila, Vatican, Basilique Saint-Pierre

Pope Saint Leo I

(the Great)

(Reigned 440-461).

Place and date of birth unknown; died 10 November, 461. Leo's pontificate, next to that of St. Gregory I, is the most significant and important in Christian antiquity. At a time when the Church was experiencing the greatest obstacles to her progress in consequence of the hastening disintegration of the Western Empire, while the Orient was profoundly agitated over dogmatic controversies, this great pope, with far-seeing sagacity and powerful hand, guided the destiny of the Roman and Universal Church. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Mommsen, I, 101 sqq., ed. Duchesne, I, 238 sqq.), Leo was a native of Tuscany and his father's name was Quintianus. Our earliest certain historical information about Leo reveals him a deacon of the Roman Church under Pope Celestine I (422-32). Even during this period he was known outside of Rome, and had some relations with Gaul, since Cassianus in 430 or 431 wrote at Leo's suggestion his work "De Incarnatione Domini contra Nestorium" (Migne, P.L., L, 9 sqq.), prefacing it with a letter of dedication to Leo. About this time Cyril of Alexandria appealed to Rome against the pretensions of Bishop Juvenal of Jerusalem. From an assertion of Leo's in a letter of later date (ep. cxvi, ed. Ballerini, I, 1212; II, 1528), it is not very clear whether Cyril wrote to him in the capacity of Roman deacon, or to Pope Celestine. During the pontificate of Sixtus III (422-40), Leo was sent to Gaul by Emperor Valentinian III to settle a dispute and bring about a reconciliation between Aëtius, the chief military commander of the province, and the chief magistrate, Albinus. This commission is a proof of the great confidence placed in the clever and able deacon by the Imperial Court. Sixtus III died on 19 August, 440, while Leo was in Gaul, and the latter was chosen his successor. Returning to Rome, Leo was consecrated on 29 September of the same year, and governed the Roman Church for the next twenty-one years.

Leo's chief aim was to sustain the unity of the Church. Not long after his elevation to the Chair of Peter, he saw himself compelled to combat energetically the heresies which seriously threatened church unity even in the West. Leo had ascertained through Bishop Septimus of Altinum, that in Aquileia priests, deacons, and clerics, who had been adherents of Pelagius, were admitted to communion without an explicit abjuration of their heresy. The pope sharply censured this procedure, and directed that a provincial synod should be assembled in Aquileia, at which such persons were to be required to abjurePelagianism publicly and to subscribe to an unequivocal confession of Faith (epp. i and ii). This zealouspastor waged war even more strenuously against Manichæism, inasmuch as its adherents, who had been driven from Africa by the Vandals, had settled in Rome, and had succeeded in establishing a secret Manichæan community there. The pope ordered the faithful to point out these heretics to the priests, and in 443, together with the senators and presbyters, conducted in person an investigation, in the course of which the leaders of the community were examined. In several sermons he emphatically warned the Christians of Rome to be on their guard against this reprehensible heresy, and repeatedly charged them to give information about its followers, their dwellings, acquaintances, and rendezvous (Sermo ix, 4, xvi, 4; xxiv, 4; xxxiv, 4 sq.; xlii, 4 sq.; lxxvi, 6). A number of Manichæans in Rome were converted and admitted to confession; others, who remained obdurate, were in obedience to imperial decrees banished from Rome by the civil magistrates. On 30 January, 444, the pope sent a letter to all the bishops of Italy, to which he appended the documents containing his proceedings against the Manichæans in Rome, and warned them to be on their guard and to take action against the followers of the sect (ep. vii). On 19 June, 445, Emperor Valentinian III issued, doubtless at the pope's instigation, a stern edict in which he established seven punishments for the Manichæans ("Epist. Leonis", ed. Ballerini, I, 626; ep. viii inter Leon. ep). Prosper of Aquitaine states in his "Chronicle" (ad an. 447; "Mon. Germ. hist. Auct. antiquissimi", IX, I, 341 sqq.) that, in consequence of Leo's energetic measures, the Manichæans were also driven out of the provinces, and even Oriental bishops emulated the pope's example in regard to this sect. In Spain the heresy of Priscillianism still survived, and for some time had been attracting fresh adherents. Bishop Turibius of Astorga became cognizant of this, and by extensive journeys collected minute information about the condition of the churches and the spread of Priscillianism. He compiled the errors of the heresy, wrote a refutation of the same, and sent these documents to several African bishops. He also sent a copy to the pope, whereupon the latter sent a lengthy letter to Turibius (ep. xv) in refutation of the errors of the Priscillianists. Leo at the same time ordered that a council of bishops belonging to the neighbouring provinces should be convened to institute a rigid enquiry, with the object of determining whether any of the bishops had become tainted with the poison of this heresy. Should any such be discovered, they were to be excommunicated without hesitation. The pope also addressed a similar letter to the bishops of the Spanish provinces, notifying them that a universal synod of all the chief pastors was to be summoned; if this should be found to be impossible, the bishops of Galicia at least should be assembled. These two synods were in fact held in Spain to deal with the points at issue (Hefele, "Konziliengesch." II, 2nd ed., pp. 306 sqq.).

The greatly disorganized ecclesiastical condition of certain countries, resulting from national migrations, demanded closer bonds between their episcopate and Rome for the better promotion of ecclesiastical life. Leo, with this object in view, determined to make use of the papal vicariate of the bishops of Arles for the province of Gaul for the creation of a centre for the Gallican episcopate in immediate union with Rome. In the beginning his efforts were greatly hampered by his conflict with St. Hilary, then Bishop of Arles. Even earlier, conflicts had arisen relative to the vicariate of the bishops of Arles and its privileges. Hilary made excessive use of his authority over other ecclesiastical provinces, and claimed that all bishops should be consecrated by him, instead of by their own metropolitan. When, for example, the complaint was raised that Bishop Celidonius of Besançon had been consecrated in violation of the canons—the grounds alleged being that he had, as a layman, married a widow, and, as a public officer, had given his consent to a death sentence—Hilary deposed him, and consecrated Importunus as his successor. Celidonius thereupon appealed to the pope and set out in person for Rome. About the same time Hilary, as if the see concerned had been vacant, consecrated another bishop to take the place of a certain Bishop Projectus, who was ill. Projectus recovered, however, and he too laid a complaint at Rome about the action of the Bishop of Arles. Hilary then went himself to Rome to justify his proceedings. The pope assembled a Roman synod (about 445) and, when the complaints brought against Celidonius could not be verified, reinstated the latter in his see. Projectus also received his bishopric again. Hilary returned to Arles before the synod was over; the pope deprived him of jurisdiction over the other Gallic provinces and of metropolitanrights over the province of Vienne, only allowing him to retain his Diocese of Arles.

These decisions were disclosed by Leo in a letter to the bishops of the Province of Vienne (ep. x). At the same time he sent them an edict of Valentinian III of 8 July, 445, in which the pope's measures in regard to St. Hilary were supported, and the primacy of the Bishop of Rome over the whole Church solemnly recognized "Epist. Leonis," ed. Ballerini, I, 642). On his return to his bishopric Hilary sought a reconciliation with the pope. After this there arose no further difficulties between these two saintly men and, after his death in 449, Hilary was declared by Leo as "beatæ memoriæ". To Bishop Ravennius, St. Hilary's successor in the see of Arles, and the bishops of that province, Leo addressed most cordial letters in 449 on the election of the new metropolitan (epp. xl, xli). When Ravennius consecrated a little later a new bishop to take the place of the deceased Bishop of Vaison, the Archbishop of Vienne, who was then in Rome, took exception to this action. The bishops of the province of Arles then wrote a joint letter to the pope, in which they begged him to restore to Ravennius the rights of which his predecessor Hilary had been deprived (ep. lxv inter ep. Leonis). In his reply dated 5 May, 450 (ep. lxvi), Leo acceded to their request. The Archbishop of Vienne was to retain only the suffragan Bishoprics of Valence, Tarentaise, Geneva, and Grenoble; all the other sees in the Province of Vienne were made subject to the Archbishop of Arles, who also became again the mediator between the Holy See and the whole Gallic episcopate. Leo transmitted to Ravennius (ep. lxvii), for communication to the other Gallican bishops, his celebrated letter to Flavian of Constantinople on the Incarnation. Ravennius thereupon convened a synod, at which forty-four chief pastors assembled. In their synodal letter of 451, they affirm that they accept the pope's letter as a symbol of faith (ep. xxix inter ep. Leonis). In his answer Leo speaks further of the condemnation of Nestorius (ep. cii). The Vicariate of Arles for a long time retained the position Leo had accorded it. Another papal vicariate was that of the bishops of Thessalonica, whose jurisdiction extended over Illyria. The special duty of this vicariate was to protect the rights of the Holy See over the district of Eastern Illyria, which belonged to the Eastern Empire. Leo bestowed the vicariate upon Bishop Anastasius of Thessalonica, just as Pope Siricius had formerly entrusted it to Bishop Anysius. The vicar was to consecrate the metropolitans, to assemble in a synod all bishops of the Province of Eastern Illyria, to oversee their administration of their office; but the most important matters were to be submitted to Rome (epp. v, vi, xiii). But Anastasius of Thessalonica used his authority in an arbitrary and despotic manner, so much so that he was severely reproved by Leo, who sent him fuller directions for the exercise of his office (ep. xiv).

In Leo's conception of his duties as supreme pastor, the maintenance of strict ecclesiastical discipline occupied a prominent place. This was particularly important at a time when the continual ravages of the barbarians were introducing disorder into all conditions of life, and the rules of morality were being seriously violated. Leo used his utmost energy in maintining this discipline, insisted on the exact observance of the ecclesiasticalprecepts, and did not hesitate to rebuke when necessary. Letters (ep. xvii) relative to these and other matters were sent to the different bishops of the Western Empire—e.g., to the bishops of the Italian provinces (epp. iv, xix, clxvi, clxviii), and to those of Sicily, who had tolerated deviations from the Roman Liturgy in the administration of Baptism (ep. xvi), and concerning other matters (ep. xvii). A very important disciplinary decree was sent to bishopRusticus of Narbonne (ep. clxvii). Owing to the dominion of the Vandals in Latin North Africa, the position of the Church there had become extremely gloomy. Leo sent the Roman priest Potentius thither to inform himself about the exact condition, and to forward a report to Rome. On receiving this Leo sent a letter of detailed instructions to the episcopate of the province about the adjustment of numerous ecclesiastical and disciplinary questions (ep. xii). Leo also sent a letter to Dioscurus of Alexandria on 21 July, 445, urging him to the strict observance of the canons and discipline of the Roman Church (ep. ix). The primacy of the Roman Church was thus manifested under this pope in the most various and distinct ways. But it was especially in his interposition in the confusion of the Christological quarrels, which then so profoundly agitated Eastern Christendom, that Leo most brilliantly revealed himself the wise, learned, and energetic shepherd of the Church (see MONOPHYSITISM). From his first letter on this subject, written to Eutyches on 1 June, 448 (ep. xx), to his last letter written to the new orthodoxPatriarch of Alexandria, Timotheus Salophaciolus, on 18 August, 460 (ep. clxxi), we cannot but admire the clear, positive, and systematic manner in which Leo, fortified by the primacy of the Holy See, took part in this difficult entanglement. For particulars refer to the articles: EUTYCHES ; SAINT FLAVIAN; ROBBER COUNCIL OF EPHESUS.

Eutyches appealed to the pope after he had been excommunicated by Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, on account of his Monophysite views. The pope, after investigating the disputed question, sent his sublime dogmatic letter to Flavian (ep. xxviii), concisely setting forth and confirming the doctrine of the Incarnation, and the union of the Divine and human natures in the one Person of Christ . In 449 the council, which was designated by Leo as the "Robber Synod", was held. Flavian and other powerful prelates of the East appealed to the pope. The latter sent urgent letters to Constantinople, particularly to Emperor Theodosius II and Empress Pulcheria, urging them to convene a general council in order to restore peace to the Church. To the same end he used his influence with the Western emperor, Valentinian III, and his mother Galla Placidia, especially during their visit to Rome in 450. This general council was held in Chalcedon in 451 under Marcian, the successor of Theodosius. It solemnly accepted Leo's dogmatical epistle to Flavian as an expression of the CatholicFaith concerning the Person of Christ. The pope confirmed the decrees of the Council after eliminating the canon, which elevated the Patriarchate of Constantinople, while diminishing the rights of the ancient Oriental patriarchs. On 21 March, 453, Leo issued a circular letter confirming his dogmatic definition (ep. cxiv). Through the mediation of Bishop Julian of Cos, who was at that time the papal ambassador in Constantinople, the pope tried to protect further ecclesiastical interests in the Orient. He persuaded the new Emperor of Constantinople, Leo I, to remove the heretical and irregular patriarch, Timotheus Ailurus, from the See of Alexandria. A new and orthodox patriarch, Timotheus Salophaciolus, was chosen to fill his place, and received the congratulations of the pope in the last letter which Leo ever sent to the Orient.

In his far-reaching pastoral care of the Universal Church, in the West and in the East, the pope never neglected the domestic interests of the Church at Rome. When Northern Italy had been devastated by Attila, Leo by a personal encounter with the King of the Huns prevented him from marching upon Rome. At the emperor's wish, Leo, accompanied by the Consul Avienus and the Prefect Trigetius, went in 452 to Upper Italy, and met Attila at Mincio in the vicinity of Mantua, obtaining from him the promise that he would withdraw from Italy and negotiate peace with the emperor. The pope also succeeded in obtaining another great favour for the inhabitants of Rome. When in 455 the city was captured by the Vandals under Genseric, although for a fortnight the town had been plundered, Leo's intercession obtained a promise that the city should not be injured and that the lives of the inhabitants should be spared. These incidents show the high moral authority enjoyed by the pope, manifested even in temporal affairs. Leo was always on terms of intimacy with the Western Imperial Court. In 450 Emperor Valentinian III visited Rome, accompanied by his wife Eudoxia and his mother Galla Placidia. On the feast of Cathedra Petri (22 February), the Imperial family with their brilliant retinue took part in the solemn services at St. Peter's, upon which occasion the pope delivered an impressive sermon. Leo was also active in building and restoring churches. He built a basilica over the grave of Pope Cornelius in the Via Appia. The roof of St. Paul's without the Walls having been destroyed by lightning, he had it replaced, and undertook other improvements in the basilica. He persuaded Empress Galla Placidia, as seen from the inscription, to have executed the great mosaic of the Arch of Triumph, which has survived to our day. Leo also restored St. Peter's on the Vatican. During his pontificate a pious Roman lady, named Demetria, erected on her property on the Via Appia a basilica in honour of St. Stephen, the ruins of which have been excavated.

Leo was no less active in the spiritual elevation of the Roman congregations, and his sermons, of which ninety-six genuine examples have been preserved, are remarkable for their profundity, clearness of diction, and elevated style. The first five of these, which were delivered on the anniversaries of his consecration, manifest his lofty conception of the dignity of his office, as well as his thorough conviction of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, shown forth in so outspoken and decisive a manner by his whole activity as supreme pastor. Of his letters, which are of great importance for church history, 143 have come down to us: we also possess thirty which were sent to him. The so-called "Sacramentarium Leonianum" is a collection of orations and prefaces of the Mass, prepared in the second half of the sixth century. Leo died on 10 November, 461, and was buried in the vestibule of St. Peter's on the Vatican. In 688 Pope Sergius had his remains transferred to the basilica itself, and a special altar erected over them. They rest today in St. Peter's, beneath the altar specially dedicated to St. Leo. In 1754 Benedict XIV exalted him to the dignity of Doctor of the Church (doctor ecclesiæ). In the Latin Church the feast day of the great pope is held on 11 April, and in the Eastern Church on 18 February.

Continuing our journey
through the Fathers of the Church, true stars that shine in the distance, at
our meeting today we encounter a Pope who in 1754 Benedict XIV proclaimed a
Doctor of the Church: St Leo the Great. As the nickname soon attributed to
him by tradition suggests, he was truly one of the greatest Pontiffs to have
honoured the Roman See and made a very important contribution to strengthening
its authority and prestige. He was the first Bishop of Rome to have been called
Leo, a name used subsequently by another 12 Supreme Pontiffs, and was also the
first Pope whose preaching to the people who gathered round him during
celebrations has come down to us. We spontaneously think of him also in the
context of today's Wednesday General Audiences, events that in past decades
have become a customary meeting of the Bishop of Rome with the faithful and the
many visitors from every part of the world.

Leo was a Tuscan native. In
about the year 430 A.D., he became a deacon of the Church of Rome, in which he
acquired over time a very important position. In the year 440 his prominent
role induced Galla Placidia, who then ruled the Empire of the West, to send him
to Gaul to heal a difficult situation. But in the summer of that year, Pope
Sixtus III, whose name is associated with the magnificent mosaics in St Mary
Major's, died, and it was Leo who was elected to succeed him. Leo heard the
news precisely while he was carrying out his peace mission in Gaul. Having
returned to Rome, the new Pope was consecrated on 29 September 440. This is how
his Pontificate began. It lasted more than 21 years and was undoubtedly one of
the most important in the Church's history. Pope Leo died on 10 November 461
and was buried near the tomb of St Peter. Today, his relics are preserved in
one of the altars in the Vatican Basilica.

The times in which Pope Leo
lived were very difficult: constant barbarian invasions, the gradual
weakening of imperial authority in the West and the long, drawn-out social
crisis forced the Bishop of Rome - as was to happen even more obviously a
century and a half later during the Pontificate of Gregory the Great - to play
an important role in civil and political events. This, naturally, could only
add to the importance and prestige of the Roman See. The fame of one particular
episode in Leo's life has endured. It dates back to 452 when the Pope, together
with a Roman delegation, met Attila, chief of the Huns, in Mantua and dissuaded
him from continuing the war of invasion by which he had already devastated the
northeastern regions of Italy. Thus, he saved the rest of the Peninsula. This
important event soon became memorable and lives on as an emblematic sign of the
Pontiff's action for peace. Unfortunately, the outcome of another Papal
initiative three years later was not as successful, yet it was a sign of
courage that still amazes us: in the spring of 455 Leo did not manage to
prevent Genseric's Vandals, who had reached the gates of Rome, from invading
the undefended city that they plundered for two weeks. This gesture of the Pope
- who, defenceless and surrounded by his clergy, went forth to meet the invader
to implore him to desist - nevertheless prevented Rome from being burned and
assured that the Basilicas of St Peter, St Paul and St John, in which part of
the terrified population sought refuge, were spared.

We are familiar with Pope
Leo's action thanks to his most beautiful sermons - almost 100 in a splendid
and clear Latin have been preserved - and thanks to his approximately 150
letters. In these texts the Pontiff appears in all his greatness, devoted to
the service of truth in charity through an assiduous exercise of the Word which
shows him to us as both Theologian and Pastor. Leo the Great, constantly
thoughtful of his faithful and of the people of Rome but also of communion
between the different Churches and of their needs, was a tireless champion and
upholder of the Roman Primacy, presenting himself as the Apostle Peter's
authentic heir: the many Bishops who gathered at the Council of Chalcedon,
the majority of whom came from the East, were well aware of this.

This Council, held in 451
and in which 350 Bishops took part, was the most important assembly ever to
have been celebrated in the history of the Church. Chalcedon represents the
sure goal of the Christology of the three previous Ecumenical Councils:
Nicea in 325, Constantinople in 381 and Ephesus in 431. By the sixth century
these four Councils that sum up the faith of the ancient Church were already
being compared to the four Gospels. This is what Gregory the Great affirms in a
famous letter (I, 24): "I confess that I receive and revere, as the
four books of the Gospel so also the four Councils", because on them,
Gregory explains further, "as on a four-square stone, rises the structure
of the holy faith". The Council of Chalcedon, which rejected the heresy of
Eutyches who denied the true human nature of the Son of God, affirmed the union
in his one Person, without confusion and without separation, of his two
natures, human and divine.

The Pope asserted this
faith in Jesus Christ, true God and true man, in an important doctrinal text
addressed to the Bishop of Constantinople, the so-calledTome
to Flavian which, read at Chalcedon, was received by the Bishops present
with an eloquent acclamation. Information on it has been preserved in the
proceedings of the Council: "Peter has spoken through the mouth of
Leo", the Council Fathers announced in unison. From this intervention in
particular, but also from others made during the Christological controversy in
those years, it is clear that the Pope felt with special urgency his
responsibilities as Successor of Peter, whose role in the Church is unique
since "to one Apostle alone was entrusted what was communicated to all the
Apostles", as Leo said in one of his sermons for the Feast of Sts Peter
and Paul (83, 2). And the Pontiff was able to exercise these responsibilities,
in the West as in the East, intervening in various circumstances with caution,
firmness and lucidity through his writings and legates. In this manner he
showed how exercising the Roman Primacy was as necessary then as it is today to
effectively serve communion, a characteristic of Christ's one Church.

Aware of
the historical period in which he lived and of the change that was taking place
- from pagan Rome to Christian Rome - in a period of profound crisis, Leo the
Great knew how to make himself close to the people and the faithful with his
pastoral action and his preaching. He enlivened charity in a Rome tried by
famines, an influx of refugees, injustice and poverty. He opposed pagan
superstitions and the actions of Manichaean groups. He associated the liturgy
with the daily life of Christians: for example, by combining the practice
of fasting with charity and almsgiving above all on the occasion of the Quattro
tempora, which in the course of the year marked the change of seasons. In
particular, Leo the Great taught his faithful - and his words still apply for
us today - that the Christian liturgy is not the memory of past events, but the
actualization of invisible realities which act in the lives of each one of us.
This is what he stressed in a sermon (cf. 64, 1-2) on Easter, to be celebrated
in every season of the year "not so much as something of the past as
rather an event of the present". All this fits into a precise project, the
Holy Pontiff insisted: just as, in fact, the Creator enlivened with the
breath of rational life man formed from the dust of the ground, after the
original sin he sent his Son into the world to restore to man his lost dignity
and to destroy the dominion of the devil through the new life of grace.

This is
the Christological mystery to which St Leo the Great, with his Letter to the
Council of Ephesus, made an effective and essential contribution, confirming for
all time - through this Council - what St Peter said at Caesarea Philippi. With
Peter and as Peter, he professed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the
living God". And so it is that God and man together "are not foreign
to the human race but alien to sin" (cf. Serm. 64). Through the
force of this Christological faith he was a great messenger of peace and love.
He thus shows us the way: in faith we learn charity. Let us therefore
learn with St Leo the Great to believe in Christ, true God and true Man, and to
implement this faith every day in action for peace and love of neighbour.

To special groups

I offer a
warm welcome to all the English-speaking visitors and pilgrims attending
today's Audience, including the groups from England, Denmark, Sweden,
Indonesia, Canada and the United States. I extend particular greetings to the
visitors from Christendom College and to the many student groups present. May
this Lenten Season purify your hearts and renew your faith and your hope in the
mystery of Christ our Redeemer. God bless you all!

Lastly, I
greet the sick and the newly-weds. Dear sick people, may
you always be aware that you make a mysterious contribution to building the
Kingdom of God, generously offering your sufferings to the Heavenly Father in
union with those of Christ. And you, dear newly-weds, may you be able to
edify your family daily by listening to God in faithful reciprocal love and by
welcoming the neediest after the example of the Holy Family of Nazareth.

LEO was born at Rome. He embraced the sacred ministry, was made archdeacon of the Roman Church by St. Celestine, and under him and Sixtus III. had a large share in governing the Church. On the death of Sixtus, Leo was chosen Pope, and consecrated on St. Michael's day, 440, amid great joy. It was a time of terrible trial. Vandals and Huns were wasting the provinces of the empire, and Nestorians, Pelagians, and other heretics wrought more grievous havoc among souls. Whilst Leo's zeal made head against these perils, there arose the new heresy of Eutyches, who confounded the two natures of Christ. At once the vigilant pastor proclaimed the true doctrine of the Incarnation in his famous "tome;" but fostered by the Byzantine court, the heresy gained a strong hold amongst the Eastern monks and bishops. After three years of unceasing toil, Leo brought about its solemn condemnation by the Council of Chalcedon, the Fathers all signing his tome, and exclaiming, "Peter hath spoken by Leo." Soon after, Attila with his Huns broke into Italy, and marched through its burning cities upon Rome. Leo went out boldly to meet him, and prevailed on him to turn back. Astonished to see the terrible Attila, the " Scourge of God," fresh from the sack of Aquileia, Milan, Pavia, with the rich prize of Rome within his grasp, turn his great host back to the Danube at the Saint's word, his chiefs asked him why he had acted so strangely. He answered that he saw two venerable personages, supposed to be SS. Peter and Paul, standing behind Leo, and impressed by this vision he withdrew. If the perils of the Church are as great now as in St. Leo's day, St. Peter's solicitude is not less. Two years later the city fell a prey to the Vandals; but even then Leo saved it from destruction. He died A.D. 461, having ruled the Church twenty years.

REFLECTION.—Leo loved to ascribe all the fruits of his unsparing labors to the glorious chief of the Apostles, who, he often declared, lives and governs, in his successors.

A heart thus empty of itself could not fail to be supported and directed by the divine grace. He was called to the government of the church in the most difficult times, and he diligently applied himself without delay to cultivate the great field committed to his care, and especially to pluck up the weeds of errors, and to root out the thorns of vices wherever they appeared. He never intermitted to preach to his people with great zeal; which he often mentions as the most indispensable duty of pastors, and the constant practice of his predecessors. 4 A hundred and one sermons preached by this pope on the principal festivals of the year are still extant. He often inculcates in them the practice of holy fasting and alms-deeds, as good works which ought to be joined to and support each other. We have among his works nine sermons on the fast of the tenth month, or of Ember-days in December. He says, the church has instituted the Ember-days in the four seasons of the year to sanctify each season by a fast: 5 also to pay to God a tribute of thanksgiving for the fruits and other blessings which we continually receive from his bounty: 6 and to arm us constantly against the devil. He sets forth the obligation of alms, which is so great, that for this alone God gives riches, and not to be hoarded up, or lavished in superfluities: and at the last day he seems in his sentence chiefly to recompense this virtue, and to punish the neglect of it, to show us how much alms-deeds are the key of heaven, and of all other graces. 7 He says, this obligation binds all persons, though it is not to be measured by what a man has, but by the heart; for all men are bound to have the same benevolence, and desire of relieving others. 8 That the rich are obliged to seek out the bashful poor, who are to be assisted without being put to the blush in receiving. 9 He shows the institution of Collects or gatherings for the poor to be derived from the apostles, and ever to have been continued in the church for the relief of the indigent. 10 He surpasses himself in sentiment and eloquence whenever he speaks of the sweetness of the divine love which is displayed to us in the mystery of the incarnation of the Son of God. His one hundred and forty-one epistles are wholly employed in treating on important subjects of discipline and faith, and alone suffice to show his pastoral vigilance and immense labours in every part of the Christian world, for the advancement of piety. He brought many infidels to the faith, and took great delight in instructing them himself. His signal victories over the Manichees, Arians, Apollinarists, Nestorians, Eutychians, Novatians, and Donatists, are standing proofs of his zeal for the purity of the faith. Carthage being taken by the Vandals in 439, a great number of Manichees fled out of Africa to Rome: but there, to escape the rigour of the imperial laws against their sect, feigned themselves Catholics. They called wine the gall of the dragon, produced by the devil or their evil god: on which account they always refrained from that liquor, which they regarded as, of its own nature, unclean. To conceal themselves, they received the holy communion from the Catholic priests, but under one kind alone, which it was left to every one’s discretion then to do. This affectation of the heretics passed some time unobserved, as we learn from St. Leo, 11 in the year 433. 12 But he no sooner discovered this sacrilegious abuse, than he took the utmost care to prevent the contagion from infecting his flock. He detected several of these heretics, and among them one whom they called their bishop, and to manifest the impiety of this sect, he assembled several bishops and priests, and the most illustrious persons of the senate and empire, and caused the elect of the Manichees, that is, those that were initiated in their mysteries, to be introduced. 13 They confessed publicly many impious tenets, 14 superstitions, and a crime which modesty forbids to be named. 15 St. Prosper says their books were burned; but many of them repented, and abjured their heresy. St. Leo, in receiving them into the church, exhorted his people to pray and sigh with him for them. 16 Those who remained obstinate were banished. St. Leo, about the same time crushed Pelagianism, which began again to show its head about Aquileia. 17 His watchfulness put a stop to the growing evil, both in those parts and in Rome itself, where St. Prosper detected some remains of the same leaven. For this pope, who was a true judge of merit, and drew many learned men about his person, had chosen St. Prosper of Aquitain his secretary, to write his letters and dispatch the like business. The Priscillianist heretics reigned almost uncontrolled in Spain: only St. Turibius, bishop of Astorga, zealously opposed them. St. Leo wrote to commend his zeal, and to awaken the attention of the other bishops of that country, whom he ordered to convene a council for the extirpation of the spreading cancer. 18 He examined the cause of Chelidonius, bishop of Besançon, deposed by St. Hilary of Arles, and restored him to his see. 19 He transferred the dignity of primate from the see of Arles to that of Vienne in Gaul, which Zosimus had formerly adjudged to Arles, 20 “Out of respect,” as he said, “for the blessed Trophimus, (first bishop of Arles,) from the fountain of whose preaching all the Gauls had received the streams of faith.” 21 The learned De Marca thinks that St. Leo did not deny the jurisdiction of Hilary over Besançon before that time; but he judged Chelidonius not to have been guilty of that which had been laid to his charge, adding “that the sentence would have stood firm, if the things objected had been true.” 22 St. Leo laid down this important maxim for the rule of his conduct, never to give any decision, especially to the prejudice of another, before he had examined into the affair with great caution and exactness, and most carefully taken all informations possible. He was very careful in the choice of persons whom he promoted to holy orders, as his writings show; yet the author of the Spiritual Meadow relates, that he heard Amos, patriarch of Jerusalem, say to the abbots: “Pray for me. The dreadful weight of the priesthood affrights me beyond measure, especially the charge of conferring orders. I have found it written, that the blessed Pope Leo, equal to the angels, watched and prayed forty days at the tomb of St. Peter, begging through the intercession of that apostle to obtain of God the pardon of his sins. After this term, St. Peter, in a vision, said to him: Your sins are forgiven you by God, except those committed by you in conferring holy orders: of these you still remain charged to give a rigorous account.” 23 St. Leo, with regard to those who are to be ordained ministers of the altar, lays down this rule, inserted in his words into the body of the canon law: “What is it not to lay hands upon any one suddenly, according to the precept of the apostle, but not to raise to the honour of the priesthood any who have not been thoroughly tried, or before a mature age, a competent time of trial, the merit of labour in the service of the church, and sufficient proofs given of their submission to rule, and their love of discipline and zeal for its observance.” 24

2

Many affairs in the churches of the East furnished this great pope with much employment, as the intrusion of Bassian into the see of Ephesus, 25 &c. But above all the rest, the rising heresy of Eutyches drew his attention on that side of the world. This heresiarch had been condemned by St. Flavian in 448; yet, by the intrigues of Chrysaphius, a powerful eunuch, he prevailed with the weak Emperor Theodosius II. to assemble a packed council at Ephesus, in which Dioscorus, the wicked patriarch of Alexandria, an Eutychian, and general disturber of Christian peace, took upon him to preside. This pretended synod, commonly called the Latrocinale, or cabal of Ephesus, met on the 8th of August, 449, acquitted Eutyches, and condemned St. Flavian, with a degree of malice and violence unheard of among barbarians. 26 The legates of Leo, who were Julius, bishop of Puozzoli, the ancient Puteoli, Renatus, a priest, Hilarius, a deacon, and Dulcitius, a notary, refused to subscribe to the unjust sentence, and opposed it with zeal and vigour that were admired by the whole world, says Theodoret. 27 Upon the first advice of these proceedings, St. Leo declared them null and void, 28 and at the same time he wrote to St. Flavian to encourage him, and to the emperor himself, telling him that no sacrilegious cabal ever came up to the fury of this assembly, 29 and conjuring him in these words: “Leave to the bishops the liberty of defending the faith: no powers or terrors of the world will ever be able to destroy it. Protect the church, and seek to preserve its peace, that Christ may protect your empire.” He adds, that he trembles to see him draw down the divine vengeance upon his own head; which had the appearance of a prediction on account of the various misfortunes which befel that prince and his sudden death: though before the latter event his eyes began to be opened. Marcian and St. Pulcheria, succeeding in the empire, vigorously supported the zealous endeavours of the pope. By his authority the general council of Chalcedon, consisting of six hundred or six hundred and thirty bishops, was opened on the 8th of October in 451. St. Leo presided by his legates, Paschasinus, bishop of Lilybæum; Lucentius, bishop of Ascoli; and Boniface, priest of Rome. In this synod the memory of St. Flavian was vindicated; and Dioscorus was convicted of having maliciously suppressed the letters of St. Leo in the Latrocinale of Ephesus, and of having presumed to excommunicate St. Leo, which attempt was made the principal cause of his deposition: for which, besides other crimes, it was also urged against him, that he had pretended to hold a general council without the authority of the pope, a thing never lawful, and never done, as was observed by the pope’s legates. 30 For these crimes and excesses, he was by the pope’s legates and the whole council declared excommunicated and deposed. 31 St. Leo had written to St. Flavian on the 13th of June in 449, a long and accurate doctrinal letter, in which he clearly expounded the Catholic faith concerning the mystery of the incarnation, against the errors both of Nestorius and Eutyches. This excellent letter had been suppressed by Dioscorus, but was read by the legates at Chalcedon, and declared by the voice of that general council to be dictated by the Holy Ghost, and to be a rule throughout the universal church. The great Theodoret having read it, blessed God for having preserved his holy faith. 32 St. Leo approved all things that had been done in this council relating to definitions of faith; but, being an enemy to innovations, vigorously opposed the twenty-eighth canon, framed in the absence of his legates, by which the Archbishop of Constantinople was declared a patriarch, 33 and the first among the patriarchs of the East. 34 However, the Eastern bishops, who usually found access to the emperor through the Bishop of Constantinople, allowed him that pre-eminence, which the law of custom confirmed. 35 The same council declared the Bishop of Jerusalem independent of Antioch, and primate of the three Palestines. 36 In the synodal letter to St. Leo, the fathers beseech him to confirm their decrees, saying, “he had presided over them as the head over its members.” 37 The pope restrained his confirmation to the decrees relating to matters of faith, 38 which were received with the utmost respect imaginable by the whole church. Theodoret was restored to his see in the council, after having anathematized Nestorius. Ibas, bishop of Edessa, who had been unjustly deposed with Theodoret in the Latrocinale of Ephesus, was likewise restored upon the same condition. The latter seems never to have been very solicitous about Nestorius, but was a warm defender of Theodorus of Mopsuestia, whom he regarded as an orthodox doctor, because he died in the communion of the church. Ibas was accused of Nestorianism, but acquitted by Domnus, patriarch of Antioch, and a council held in that city in 448. But his letter to Maris, the Persian, was afterwards condemned in the fifth general council.

3

Whilst the Eastern empire was thus distracted by heretical factions, the Western was harassed by barbarians. Attila, the Hunn, enriched with the plunder of many nations and cities, marched against Rome. 39 In the general consternation, St. Leo, at the request of the whole city of Rome, went to meet Attila, in hopes of mollifying his rage, and averting the danger that threatened his country. Avienus, a man of consular dignity, and Trygetius, who had been prefect of the city, were deputed to accompany him in this embassy. They found the haughty tyrant at Ambuleium, near Ravenna, where the highway passes the river Menzo. Contrary to the expectation of every one, he received the pope with great honour, gave him a favourable audience, and, through his suggestion, concluded a treaty of peace with the empire on the condition of an annual tribute. Baronius, from a writer of the eighth century, relates, that Attila saw two venerable personages, supposed to be the apostles SS. Peter and Paul, standing on the side of the pope whilst he spoke. The king immediately commanded his army to forbear all hostilities, and soon after repassed the Alps, and retired beyond the Danube into Pannonia; but in his way home was seized with a violent vomiting of blood, of which he died in 453. Divisions among his children and princes destroyed the empire of the Hunns. 40 Thus fell the most haughty and furious of all the barbarian heathen kings, styled the terror of the world, and the Scourge of God, whose instrument he was in punishing the sins of Christians. It was the glory of St. Leo to have checked his fury and protected Rome, when it was in no condition of defence. In 455, the friends of Aëtius (whose greatness and arrogance had given the emperor so much umbrage that he caused him to be assassinated) revenged the death of that general by the murder of Valentinian himself. His wife Eudoxia married by compulsion the tyrant Maximus, who had usurped his throne; but, not brooking these affronts, she invited Genseric, the Arian Vandal king, from Africa, to come and revenge the murder of her husband. Maximus fled; but was slain by Valentinian’s servants on the 12th of June, in the twenty-seventh day of his reign, in 455. Three days after, Genseric arrived, and found the gates of Rome open to receive him. St. Leo went out to meet him, and prevailed with him to restrain his troops from slaughter and burning, and to content himself with the plunder of the city. The example of St. Leo shows, that even in the worst of times, a holy pastor is the greatest comfort and support of his flock. After the departure of the Vandals with their captives, and an immense booty, St. Leo sent zealous Catholic priests and alms for the relief of the captives in Africa. He repaired the Basilics, and replaced the rich plate and ornaments of the churches which had been plundered, though some part had escaped by being concealed, especially what belonged to the churches of SS. Peter and Paul, which Baronius thinks Genseric spared, and granted to them the privilege of sanctuaries, as was done at other times. This great pope, for his humility, mildness, and charity, was reverenced and beloved by emperors, princes, and all ranks of people, even infidels and barbarians. He filled the holy see twenty-one years, one month, and thirteen days, dying on the 10th of November, 461. His body was interred in the church of St. Peter, and afterwards translated to another place, in the same church, on the 11th of April; on which day his name is placed in the Roman Calendar. His relics were again translated with great solemnity and devotion, inclosed in a case of lead, and placed in the altar dedicated to God under his invocation, in the Vatican church, in the year 1715, as is related at length by Pope Benedict XIV. 41 A writer who delights in relating slander, could not refuse this character of St. Leo: “He was,” says he, “without doubt, a man of extraordinary parts, far superior to all who had governed that church before him, and scarce equalled by any since.” 42

4

The writings of this great pastor are the monuments of his extraordinary genius and piety. 43 His thoughts are true, bright, and strong; and in every sentiment and expression we find a loftiness which raises our admiration. By it we are dazzled and surprised in every period, and whilst we think it impossible that the style should not sink, we are astonished always to find it swelling in the same tenour, and with equal dignity and strength. His diction is pure and elegant; his style concise, clear, and pleasing. It would sometimes appear turgid in another; but in him, where it seems to swell the highest, a natural ease and delicacy remove all appearance of affectation and study, and show it to be the pure effort of a surprising genius and lofty natural eloquence. But the dress with which he clothes his thoughts, is much less to be considered than the subjects themselves of which he treats; in which the most consummate piety and skill in theology equally raise admiration, instruct and edify his readers in the learned and pious sermons, and doctrinal letters which compose his works. His unwearied zeal and unshaken steadiness against vice and error, though armed with all the power of a world leagued with the devils against the truth, procured the church infinite advantages and victories over the reigning novelties of that age; and his writings are an armory against all succeeding heresies. He fully and clearly explains the whole mystery of the incarnation; he proves, 44 against the Eutychians, that Christ had a true body, because his body is really received in the holy eucharist. He laments as the greatest of spiritual evils, that at Alexandria, during the violences exercised by the Eutychians, the oblation of the sacrifice, and the benediction of chrism had been interrupted. 45 He is very explicit on the supremacy of St. Peter, 46 and on that of his successors. 47 He often recommends himself to the prayers of the saints reigning in heaven, especially of St. Peter, and exhorts others to place great confidence in their powerful intercession. 48 He honours their relics and festivals. 49 And testifies that their churches were adorned with lights. 50 He calls the fast of Lent an apostolical tradition, also that of the Ember-days, Whitsun-eve, &c. 51 He adds, that the church retained the fast of Ember-days in December from the Jewish practice before Christ. Pope Benedict XIV., in a decree by which he commands St. Leo to be honoured with the mass peculiar to doctors, dated in 1744, bestows on him due praises for his eminent learning and sanctity. 52

5

According to the observation of this holy doctor 53 it is a fundamental maxim of our holy religion, that the only true and valuable riches consist in that blessed poverty of spirit which Christ teaches us to look upon as the first and main step to all happiness. This is a profound and sincere humility of heart, and a perfect disengagement from all inordinate love of earthly goods. By this rule, those who are exalted above others by their rank, learning, or other abilities, differ not by these advantages from the poorest in the eyes of God: only poverty of spirit makes the distinction, and shows which is truly the greatest. Of this courageous poverty the apostles and primitive Christians set us the most illustrious example. “What is greater than this their humility? What is richer than this their poverty?” By imitating this spirit, we enter into the possession of the riches of Christ. And we shall improve our share in all these spiritual treasures of grace, love, peace, and all virtues, in proportion as we shall advance in this spirit. St. Leo puts us in mind in another place, 54 that in putting on this spirit, which is no other than that of Christ or the new man, consists that newness of life in which we are bound to walk according to the spirit of Christ; which delivers us from the powers of darkness, and transfers us into the kingdom of the Son of God; which raises our love and desires of heavenly goods, and extinguishes in us the concupiscence of the flesh. We put on this spirit by baptism, and we strengthen ourselves in it by being fed with the body of Christ. “For what is the fruit of our partaking of the body and blood of Christ, but that we may pass into that which we receive; and that in whom we are dead, and buried, and raised again (in the newness of our spirit and life) we may bear him both in spirit and in our flesh through all things.” Next to frequent devout communion, the assiduous meditation on the life of Christ is the most powerful means of learning the true spirit of his divine virtues, particularly of that humility of which his whole life was the most astonishing model, and which is the summary of his holy precepts. 55 St. Leo, by his tender devotion to our Redeemer, and the zeal with which he defended the mystery of his incarnation, was penetrated with his spirit of poverty and humility; from whence sprang that ardent charity, that admirable greatness of soul, and that invincible courage which were so conspicuous in all his actions. 6

Note 12. This practice they continued, till pope Gelasius, in 496, above forty years after St. Leo’s time, effectually to prevent those sacrilegious and superstitious communions of unworthy hypocrites, commanded all to receive under both kinds: which law subsisted at Rome as long as the Manichæan heresy made it necessary: but after that danger was over, this ordinance of discipline ceased by disuse.

Note 14. Dr. Lardner, in his Credibility of the Gospel, vol. ix. charges St. Leo with falsely accusing the Manichees of abominable practices without the least colour of reason. He ought to have taken notice that though the testimony of St. Leo is alone satisfactory, we must certainly believe these heretics against themselves, for they were publicly convicted of these crimes, and openly confessed the same before the most illustrious personages of the church and state. See Cacciari, Exercitationes in Op. S. Leonis M. de Manichæorum hæresi, l. 2. c. 7. p. 142. c. 9. p. 154.

Note 15. Ep. 15. ad Turib. p. 62. Serm. 15.

Note 16. Serm. 33. Ep. 8.

Note 17. Ep. 15.

Note 18. Ib.

Note 19. Ep. 9. 10.

Note 20. See Baronius, ad an. 417.

Note 21. Zosimus, Ep. ad ep. Gal.

Note 22. A notorious slanderer has presumed to fasten upon St. Leo the censure of haughtiness and injustice in this affair: but he certainly only betrays his own malice. Hilary was present in the pope’s council at Rome, together with Chelidonius; but was not able to make good his charge against him. He had also ordained another bishop to the see of Projectus whilst he was living, who being then sick afterward recovered. This precipitate action of Hilary was an infraction of the canons: nor does his apologist, the author of his life, offer any excuse. To satisfy the clamours of Chelidonius, Projectus, and others, and chiefly by his example to enforce the most strict observation of that important canon, the neglect of which would fill the church on every side with schisms and confusion, St. Leo deprived Hilary of the primacy over the province of Vienne for the time to come, though he restored part of it to his successor. See Fabre, Panégyrique et Histoire de la Ville d’Arles, 1743. St. Leo indeed seems to have not been acquainted in the beginning with the true character of St. Hilary, and therefore to have proceeded with the greater severity: but he showed that his heart was incapable of rancour by the ample testimony which he gave to the sanctity of St. Hilary after his death, in a letter to his successor Ravennus, ep. 37. ed. Quesn. 38. ed. Rom. p. 171. t. 2.

Note 33. The episcopal see of Byzantium was subject to the metropolitan of Heraclea in Thrace, till, in the reign of Constantine, it was honoured with the metropolitical dignity. By the second general council, held at Constantinople, a precedence was given to the archbishops of this city, before all the other bishops and patriarchs of the East, and from that time they exercised a superior jurisdiction over Thrace, Asia Minor and Pontus: which Theodoret calls (Hist. l. 5. c. 28.) three districts, consisting of twenty-eight provinces, which St. Chrysostom governed. This decree of the council of Constantinople is called by some the date of its patriarchal dignity; though it be more properly referred by others to the twenty-eighth canon of the council of Chalcedon. See Thomassin, Discipline de l’Eglise, l. 1. c. 6. p. 22. Le Quien shows that this canon was originally framed by the clergy of Constantinople, and the bishops whose situation rendered them dependant on that church: that St. Leo rejected it, and stirred up the other Oriental patriarchs and bishops to maintain the ancient discipline: that St. Proterius, patriarch of Alexandria, and all the bishops of Egypt, strenuously opposed this innovation, and so great a number among the Oriental bishops vigorously exerted their zeal against it, that the archbishops of Constantinople dropped their pretensions to this privilege till it was revived by Acacius: from which time it gradually gained ground, till at length other churches acquiesced in it. See Le Quien, Oriens Christianus de Patriarchatu Constantinopolitano, c. 9. t. 1. p. 46. Item. de Patr. Alexandr. t. 2. p. 339.

Note 34. St. Leo, ep. 87, 92.

Note 35. See Thomassin, Discipline de l’Eglise, l. 1. ch. 6.

Note 36. Sess. 7.

Note 37. Conc. t. 4. p. 833.

Note 38. St. Leo. ep. 87. c. 2. p. 613. ep. 92. c. 5. p. 623. &c.

Note 39. The Hunns, a savage nation from that part of Scythia which now lies in Muscovy, had passed the Palus Mæotis, in 276, and made their first inroads upon the coasts of the Caspian Sea, and as far as Mount Taurus in the East. Almost two hundred years after this, Attila, the most powerful and barbarous of all the kings of that nation, in 433, had marched first into the East, then subject to Theodosius the Younger, and having amassed a vast booty in Asia, returned into Pannonia, where he was already master of a large territory. His next expedition was directed against the western part of the empire. His army marching through Germany, drew along with it additional supplies from all the barbarous nations near which it passed, and amounted at length to the number of five hundred, Jornandes says seven hundred thousand fighting men; all stirred up by no other motive than the hope of great spoils from the plunder of the richest countries of the empire. Entering Gaul, Attila laid in ruins Tongres, Triers, and Metz. Troyes was spared by him, at the entreaty of St. Lupus, and St. Nicasius preserved Rheims. The barbarian had just taken Orleans by storm, when Aëtius, the Roman general, came up with him, expelled him that city, and followed him to the plains of Mauriac or Challons, which, according to Jornandes, were extended in length one hundred miles, and seventy in breadth, and seem to have comprised the whole country, known since the sixth century under the name of Champagne. Here Attila halted, and when Aëtius with the Romans, Visigoths, and Burgundians, came up, these vast fields seemed covered with troops. In a most bloody battle, the Hunns were here discomfited. Attila, enraged at this defeat, and having repaired his losses of the former year, entered Italy by Pannonia, in 453, took and burned Aquileia, and filled the whole country with blood and desolation. Some of the inhabitants, who fled from his arms into the little islands in the shallow lakes at the head of the Adriatic Gulf, here laid the foundations of the city of Venice, which we find named by Cassiodorus, fifty years after this event. Attila sacked Milan, razed Pavia, and wherever he passed laid waste whole provinces. The weak Emperor Valentinian III. shut himself up in Ravenna, and the Romans, in the utmost terror, expected to see the barbarian speedily before their gates. Such was the state of affairs when Leo went to meet Attila.

Note 40. Jornand. Rer. Goth. c. 12. 49. Prosp. in Chron. ad an. 452.

Note 41. De Canoniz. l. 4. c. 22. s. 8, 9, 10. t. 4. pp. 212, 213.

Note 42. Bower the apostate Jesuit, in his Lives of the Popes, on St. Leo, t. 2.

Note 43. Quesnel’s edition of the works of St. Leo, more ample than any that had preceded, appeared at Paris, in 1675, was condemned by the Roman inquisition, in 1676, which prohibition was inserted in the Roman Index, in 1682, p. 277. This oratorian, in several of the summaries, in many passages in the sixteen dissertations which he subjoined, and in some unwarrantable alterations of the text itself of St. Leo, is clearly convicted of dealing unfairly, in order to favour his own erroneous doctrine, and to weaken certain proofs of the authority of the holy see. The editor gave a second edition, with some critical amendments, (though not in the most essential points,) at Lyons, in 1675. Savioli, a printer at Venice, gave a new edition of the works of SS. Leo and Maximus, in 1741, with most of Quesnel’s notes and dissertations; but by supine carelessness has printed the text extremely incorrect. Poleti, another printer at Venice, published, in 1748, another edition of SS. Leo and Maximus, with the summaries of Quesnel, without his dissertations: the text is printed from Quesnel’s edition, with all its faults. The falsifications of Quesnel in this edition are complained of, and several proved upon him by Baluze, Not. et Observ. ad Con. Calced. by Antelmi, John Salinas, Coutant, &c. The collection of canons to which Quesnel has prefixed the false title of the Ancient Code of Canons of the Roman Church, (Op. S. Leonis, t. 2, p. 1,) is evidently a private compilation of canons of different ages and countries of a modern date, as Coutant (in Collect. Pontif. Romanor. Epistol. Præfat. Gener. p. 57,) and others have demonstrated. The Church of Rome made use of the code of canons of the universal Church, which Quesnel endeavoured to confine to the Eastern churches. This consisted of the canons of the four first general councils, and of the councils of Ancyra, Gangres, Neocæsarea, Antioch, and Laodicea. It was augmented by the addition of the fifty canons called of the apostles, those of Sardica and several others, made by Dionysius the Little, about the year 520. Pope Adrian I. sent a copy to Charlemagne, telling him that the Church of Rome had used this code for three hundred years. Baluze (Dissert. de Thelensi Concilio.) shows that Quesnel omitted certain passages, because he thought them too favourable to the see of Rome. In the council of Telepté, (a city in Byzacena,) Quesnel foisted in the name of Telense, for Telepté, that he might forge some argument to reject it with the Epistola Tractatoria Syricii Papæ per Africam. See Baluze and Cacciari in t. 2, Op. St. Leonis, p. 55. But enough on Quesnel’s edition of the works of St. Leo.

F. Cacciari, a Carmelite friar, printed the same at Rome, with notes, in two volumes fol. anno. 1753. The sermons of this holy pope are contained in the first, being one hundred and one in number, of which Quesnel had only given us ninety-six. In the second we have one hundred and forty-five letters of St. Leo, besides several others of emperors and other eminent persons relating to St. Leo’s affairs. Quesnel had only published one hundred and forty-one letters of this pope. They are most interesting both for Church history, and for many important dogmatical decrees and rules of discipline which they contain. F. Cacciari gave us, in 1751, Exercitationes in Opera S. Leonis, M. in folio, consisting of several dissertations on the heresies of the Manichæans, Priscillianists, Pelagians, and Eutychians. Theologians and the whole church stand much indebted to him for his labours; but the value of the present would have been enhanced if the style had been closer, and less scholastic, and the expressions on some occasions more genteel. A French translation of the sermons of St. Leo was published by Abbé de Bellegarde, at Paris, in 1701.

It is regrettable that so little
is known about the early life of this man who proved to be such an
extraordinary shepherd of the Catholic Church that he came to be known not only
as Pope Saint Leo I, but also is one of the only two Popes in two thousand years
to be called “the Great.”

What we do know is that as a
deacon of the Roman Church, before being elevated to the office of Pope in 440
AD, St. Leo the Great had opposed the heresy of Pelagianism which taught that
grace was not necessary for salvation, but was rather a bonus that God granted
to those who earned it by their good works. As Pope, St. Leo the Great
was forceful and unambiguous in his Christological teaching which affirmed the
full divinity and humanity of Christ. In fact his most famous writing,
commonly known as the Tome of St. Leo (449), was the basis of the Council of
Chalcedon’s (451) dogmatic definition of Christ as one Divine Person possessing
two complete natures, human and divine.

St. Leo the Great was Pope during
the middle of the fifth century, a troubled time when barbarian armies were
ravaging the once mighty Roman Empire. For all intents and purposes, the
Western Empire was in total political and military collapse and there was a
vacuum of political leadership. Pope St. Leo filled the void and became
the advocate for the temporal as well as spiritual needs of his flock.

He is perhaps most famous for
persuading Attila the Hun to abandon his plans to sack the city of Rome and to
withdraw his forces beyond the Danube river (452). St. Leo once again was
the spokesperson for the Roman citizenry in 455 when the Vandal barbarians
swept into Central Italy, securing concessions from them.

Through both his powerful
teaching and his leadership, Pope St. Leo the Great very much strengthened the
office of the Papacy and made a strong biblical case for the Divine institution
of this ministry by examining the biblical evidence for Peter’s unique role
among the apostles.

The writings that survive by St.
Leo, besides his famous Tome, consist of 143 letters and 96 sermons. His
sermons cover every season of the liturgical year and are indeed a treasure.
St. Leo the Great died in 461 and is regarded as one of the most
important of the Western Fathers of the Church and was declared a “Doctor of
the Church” by Pope Benedict XIV.